Former Penn State President Graham Spanier fires off another salvo in his battle against state prosecutors.He's asking a federal judge to dismiss the case against him.Spanier is facing numerous criminal charges in connection with his alleged role in what prosecutors claim was an attempt to cover up of the Sandusky scandal.Spanier along with former Athletic Director Tim Curley, and retired Senior Vice President for Finance Gary Schultz are charged with perjury, failing to report child endangerment and conspiracy.The three men all say they believed they were represented by Penn State General Counsel Cynthia Baldwin during the grand jury investigation into the Sandusky case.They claim Baldwin's testimony before the grand jury violated attorney-client privilege therefore criminal charges should be dismissed and their grand jury testimonies suppressed from any criminal trial.In March, Spanier's criminal defense attorney, Elizabeth Ainslie, filed suit against Attorney General Kathleen Kane in the U.S. Middle District Court of Pennsylvania. Kane, responded with her own motion in April, asking to have Spanier's complaint dismissed.The Attorney General's office argues that any advice Baldwin provided the defendants would not have changed the outcome of the grand jury investigation. And if the defendants assumed Baldwin represented them individually, Kane's motion says the claim of an attorney-client privilege violation still does not exist due to a crime-fraud exception.Spanier's latest motion, filed on Tuesday, asks federal Justice Yvette Kane to reject Kane's argument.According to those legal papers, Spanier is seeking Federal relief "because the prosecution was undertaken in bad faith and without a reasonable expectation of obtaining a valid conviction." Spanier's objection says as a result of "the bad faith pervading this prosecution," his constitutional right to due process has been violated.It goes on to attack lead prosecutor Frank Fina, describing Fina's actions as a "bad faith pursuit of the charges ... at any cost." The documents say Fina misled Spanier into believing he was represented by an attorney during his appearance before a grand jury "in order to obtain his uncounseled testimony."Spanier's lawyers claim "This bad faith conduct is itself a constitutional violation that can only be remedied by termination of prosecution."Dauphin County President Judge Todd Hoover is presiding over the case for Spanier, Curley and Schultz. No trial date has been set because legal motions are still being debated. If and when a trial is held it will take place in Dauphin County because that is where the grand jury met and where the charge of perjury allegedly occurred.All three defendants have pleaded not guilty.

Logged

" Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Moynihan

PITTSBURGH – The defense attorney for a suspended Pittsburgh Public Schools principal says the cultural climate since the Jerry Sandusky sex scandal at Penn State led to his client's conviction on charges that he exposed himself and made sexual advances in a health club's sauna and showers.

Defense attorney Phil DiLucente tells The Associated Press that since the Sandusky case, the public is more likely to believe sex-related allegations if they're made by multiple victims.

DiLucente's client, 37-year-old Alfonzo DeIuliis, that he engaged in sexually suggestive behavior with two men and a teen boy at a suburban fitness center last year before a jury convicted him Wednesday.

Logged

" Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Moynihan

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Gov. Tom Corbett has met with a special prosecutor investigating his handling of the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse case while he was attorney general and why it took so long to bring charges against the former Penn State assistant football coach.

The Republican governor's communications director, Lynn Lawson, told The Associated Press on Friday that the meeting was earlier this week, but she declined to disclose other details.

The investigation into how the Sandusky case was handled has its roots in Kathleen Kane's successful 2012 campaign to become the first Democrat and the first woman to be elected Pennsylvania's attorney general. During the campaign, she repeatedly questioned why it took nearly three years for charges to be filed against Sandusky.

In February 2013, Kane appointed Widener Law School professor and former federal prosecutor Geoff Moulton to lead an investigation. Moulton did not return a phone message, and Kane's spokesman declined to address Corbett's interview.

Corbett is running for a second term this year, and Moulton's report, no matter its findings, is certain to become fodder for both sides on the campaign trail in the coming months.

The Sandusky criminal investigation began while Corbett was serving as attorney general and continued through 2010, the year Corbett made his run for governor. Sandusky was arrested in November 2011, a year after Corbett's election.

The governor has cited the successful prosecution of Sandusky as proof that the state investigation was effective and strongly denied suggestions that he didn't want the investigation to become public while he was campaigning for governor.

He said early on he would likely meet with Moulton, but he suggested Kane's probe was politically motivated.

"Anybody can come in and sit down and Monday morning quarterback decisions, OK? But for a true investigation, there has to be some criminal act. I know I didn't commit any criminal act. None, zero," he said in late 2012.The Patriot-News reported on the existence of the grand jury investigation at the end of March 2011. About seven months later, the attorney general's office filed criminal molestation charges against Sandusky and charged athletic director Tim Curley and vice president Gary Schultz with perjury and other offenses for an alleged criminal cover-up. Similar charges were filed later against former Penn State president Graham Spanier.

Charges against the three former Penn State administrators are pending. All three deny the allegations.

Kane announced in February that Moulton's investigation had taken longer than expected because of a time-consuming process to retrieve emails that had been thought to have been permanently deleted when the man who briefly succeeded Corbett as attorney general, Bill Ryan, approved a new record retention policy.

Logged

" Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Moynihan

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Jerry Sandusky has been convicted and sentenced and lost an appeal, but the related prosecution of three former Penn State administrators accused of covering up child sex-abuse complaints about the former assistant football coach remains in legal limbo — a status that could soon change.

The judge overseeing the criminal case against Graham Spanier, Tim Curley and Gary Schultz said last week he was making plans that will return the case to the public's eye.

"We're going to try to get on track for later this summer," Dauphin County Judge Todd Hoover said in a brief interview in his Harrisburg chambers. "When we're doing these things, everybody will have plenty of notice about what we're dealing with."

Hoover said he was not referring to the issue at the heart of a brief open-court hearing in December — a dispute over what occurred when the three men appeared with Penn State's then-general counsel Cynthia Baldwin to testify before the grand jury investigating Sandusky three years ago, as well as Baldwin's own subsequent grand jury testimony.

Spanier, the former university president; Curley, who had been athletic director; and Schultz, former vice president for business and finance, have argued they believed Baldwin was acting as their attorney and that her actions deprived them of their right to legal representation.

Despite voluminous court filings surrounding the dispute, it remains unclear exactly what aspects Hoover will decide, but how he rules will have profound implications for the direction of the case. Hoover could decide that the defendants' legal rights were so badly violated that charges should be thrown out.

"It does seem unusual to me that it's taken five months to rule on this issue that, in a fairly high-profile case, you'd think would go to the top of the docket," said Duquesne University School of Law professor Wes Oliver, who has followed the Sandusky scandal closely.

"If this were the Jerry Sandusky case and it were dragged on for this long, people would be up in arms," Oliver said.There are several reasons why the former administrators' prosecution has moved much more slowly than Sandusky's.

Cumberland County prosecutor Dave Freed, who leads the state district attorneys' association, said issues raised by the matter involving Baldwin, a former state Supreme Court justice and university trustee, appear to be so unusual that the judge may have to research legal precedent in other states to guide him.

"I think anyone who's remotely observed what's going on in the past few years would acknowledge that this is an unprecedented situation," Freed said. "I'm not questioning the legal basis of the tactics, but the plain fact is, there's been a lot of motions and lot of pretrial litigation."

Most defendants do not have access to the type of criminal defense the former administrators can afford. A university spokesman said those costs have been funded through Penn State's insurance.

Another factor is that Curley and Schultz were initially charged along with Sandusky, but a year later, state prosecutors added new charges and for the first time charged Spanier with similar counts.

There are also questions about whether the charge of failing to report suspected child abuse applies to the three.

Their case raises issues similar to that of Monsignor William Lynn, a Philadelphia Archdiocese official whose 2012 child endangerment conviction was thrown out last year on appeal after his lawyers argued the law should not apply because Lynn was never legally responsible for any individual child's welfare.

"Outsiders and the public and the media want to see a case as a reflection of something larger, but for the most part, it isn't — it's about the very peculiar detailed facts of that particular case, and things happen that outsiders don't understand because they don't know all the details," said Schultz's attorney, Tom Farrell.

Curley's lawyer, Caroline Roberto, said it's not unusual for high-profile, complicated criminal cases to take two years to get to trial.

"I think what really causes people to take issue with our case, or raises some questions about the timing, is that for all intents and purposes, nothing happened in the Curley and Schultz case from November 2011 to November 2012," Roberto said. "And that was a decision made by the commonwealth, frankly, because they were still investigating."

(Interesting comments)

Logged

" Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Moynihan

A report into the three-year investigation of serial sex abuser Jerry Sandusky found that prosecutors, facing a shaky initial witness, had reason to take their time to build a case with multiple victims, according to sources familiar with the document.

Though raising questions about delays in the inquiry, the report, scheduled to be released Monday, does not fault prosecutors for using a grand jury to investigate Sandusky, the sources said. It also found no evidence that politics or a lack of resources influenced the investigation.

The report notes prosecutors from the state Attorney General's Office felt strongly that testimony from the first boy to accuse Sandusky would likely not have been enough to convict the former assistant football coach at Pennsylvania State University.

It does question some decisions along the way. For instance, it notes that prosecutors took too long to take certain investigative steps, including gathering reports on Sandusky from other law enforcement agencies, the sources said.

The report was commissioned and will be released by Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane, who was elected in 2012 largely on a campaign that questioned whether one of her predecessors in the job, Gov. Corbett, deliberately slowed the investigation for political purposes.More....

HARRISBURG - Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane said Monday that the state's three-year investigation into pedophile Jerry Sandusky took too long because of "crucial missteps" and "inexplicable delays" by her predecessors.

"The facts show an inexcusable lack of urgency in charging and stopping a serial child predator," Kane said in a statement, noting that the investigation only picked up in the last of the three years it took to investigate, and ultimately charge, the former assistant football coach at Pennsylvania State University.

During a news conference Monday to make public the much-anticipated report on the investigation, Kane also dropped what appeared to be a bombshell not included in the 166-page document:

She referred to two more victims who she said told prosecutors in 2011 that they had been abused by Sandusky in late 2009, months after the state investigation began - an assertion that suggested arresting Sandusky earlier may have spared them from abuse.

Kane, however, did not elaborate, except to say that they were not among the victims who testified against Sandusky during his 2012 trial and that they did not want charges brought in their cases.

The lead prosecutor in the Sandusky investigation, former Chief Deputy Attorney General Frank G. Fina, said such a claim was untrue.

"I don't know that I have words to adequately address that," Fina said of Kane's assertion, "other than it is completely false."

The inquiry into the handling of the Sandusky case had been a cornerstone of Kane's 2012 campaign for office. And while the report she commissioned raises questions about certain lulls and delays in the inquiry, it ultimately concludes that the prosecutors on the case had reason to take their time to gather evidence against Sandusky and build a case around multiple victims.

It also does not fault them for using a grand jury to investigate Sandusky - and found no evidence that politics or a lack of resources influenced the investigation.

The Sandusky investigation began in 2009, while Gov. Corbett was attorney general, and continued while Corbett was running for the state's highest office in 2010. Sandusky, a onetime top assistant to Joe Paterno, wasn't charged until November 2011.

Kane's review "revealed no direct evidence that electoral politics influenced any important decision made in the Sandusky investigation," the report states.

In her 2012 bid for office, Kane questioned whether Corbett deliberately slowed the investigation for political purposes. Instead of using a grand jury, "I would have had [Sandusky] arrested after the first victims came forward," she said then.

Kane, a Democrat, also had suggested that Corbett, a Republican, delayed the probe to avoid angering voters and donors. Politics, she told one newspaper editorial board, "probably" drove his decisions.

On Monday, she defended her decision to undertake the review, even though it did not unearth any proof of political influence. "Why those delays took place, we don't know," she said, but added that it was important for her to present the facts to the public and let it decide.

The report, which took 16 months to complete and runs, with appendices, more than 330 pages long, was authored by Geoffrey Moulton, a former federal prosecutor and law professor.

Moulton's review notes that prosecutors from the state Attorney General's Office felt strongly that testimony from the first boy to accuse Sandusky would likely not have been enough to convict the former assistant football coach at Pennsylvania State University.

But it also questions some of their decisions along the way. For instance, the report points out that prosecutors took too long to take certain investigative steps, including gathering reports on Sandusky from other law enforcement agencies.

And it notes that one of the prosecutors in the case was prepared to charge Sandusky in 2010 - and had even drafted charges - but that she could not get an answer from superiors as to whether to proceed with an arrest.

It also identifies several months in 2010 when the inquiry appeared to have ground to a halt.

Moulton's report also notes that prosecutors waited too long to ask Penn State to turn over any records of complaints against Sandusky, who spent two decades at the school and maintained a campus office even after stepping down from his coaching post.

The key subpoena to the university was not issued until December 2010 - 21 months after the attorney general took over the case. State investigators also did not visit local and university police to search for Sandusky-related records until January 2011, a step that led them to four more victims.

Moulton also faulted prosecutors for waiting until June 2011 to search Sandusky's house. In rebuttal, the prosecutors said that for months, they lacked sufficient evidence for a search warrant. There was also worry that a search, if publicized, would reveal their investigation.

The search of the house turned up photographs of Sandusky's victims, as well as a typed list of children's names - some with asterisks next to them. One was a victim prosecutors did not know about at the time.

Sandusky is serving 30 to 60 years in prison after being convicted of sexually assaulting 10 boys. Former Penn State president Graham B. Spanier and two other former ranking administrators await trial on accusations that they covered up Sandusky's conduct.

Logged

" Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Moynihan

The investigation into Jerry Sandusky took too long, but it didn’t appear to be slowed by Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett for political reasons, according to a new report issued Monday.

The 339-page report was released on Monday morning by Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane (D). She appointed H. Geoffrey Moulton Jr. last year to lead the investigation, which focused on the three-year period leading up to charges being filed in November 2011.Here are three things we learned reading the report:

1. Investigators don’t think the Pennsylvania governor’s race played any role in the investigation

2. Delays, communication failures and other headaches slowed the investigation

3. There’s nothing new regarding Penn State

The Sandusky investigation is, for obvious reasons, incredibly closely associated with Penn State. But the new report specifically notes that it does not address many “vitally important” issues, namely the actions of Penn State and various school officials. Penn State is mentioned hundreds of times in the report, of course, along with the university’s slow response to the records subpoena.

Details on the university’s action and inaction can be found in the earlier report issued by former FBI director Louis Freeh. That report found that Penn State’s leadership had “concealed Sandusky’s activities” from authorities. It also found that Joe Paterno, the former head football coach, and Graham Spanier, the former university president, knew about the 1998 investigation into allegations that Sandusky had inappropriately touched an 11-year-old boy in the Penn State showers.

Prosecutors Frank Fina and others not only accused of Attorney General Kathleen Kane of political opportunism, but vehemently denied claims in a report that stated they conducted a lousy investigation of Jerry Sandusky.

In a response to Kane's report released today that examined the investigation into former Penn State assistant coach Sandusky – that was overseen by former Attorney General and current governor Tom Corbett – the former prosecutors take harsh jabs at the report, drafted by special investigator Geoffrey Moulton.

"While we admit to having never respected [Moulton's] task, or why it exists, we will for purposes of our response take at face value his protestations that he is not an aid of a political agenda," wrote Fina and fellow former heads at the Office of the Attorney General Joseph McGettigan, Randy Feathers, Richard Sheetz and Williams Ryan.

Within the 141 pages of Moulton's investigation – which was a campaign promise of Kane's and took about 16 months to complete – are several assertions that prosecutors pursuing the Sandusky investigation could have executed a search warrant on Sandusky's home sooner.

The report also claimed no one involved in the investigation asked either Penn State police or the State College police about prior allegations against Sandusky until more than two years after the first victim reported to Clinton County Child and Youth Services that he'd been molested by Sandusky.

In their response, prosecutors call criticisms about their reluctance to execute a search warrant prior to 2011 as "factually and legally offensive." They contend that when the case came to the attorney general's office in 2009, just one victim had come forward, and those initial claims were "varied and uncorroborated."

The prosecutors – who filed a response without the attorney assigned to the case, Jonelle Eshbach – wrote that they were concerned a search warrant being executed before 2011 had a significant risk of suppression based upon "staleness and other possible challenges."

"It is simply irresponsible for this report to blithely ignore and misconstrue the facts and law that led to our prudent decision to forgo a search warrant until 2011," they wrote. The men then went on to accuse the report of "extraordinary grandstanding" on the issue by presuming the execution of a search warrant would have shortened the length of the several-years-long investigation into the former coach.

With regard to Moulton's claims that the reasons why those involved with the investigation didn't ask Penn State or State College police for information regarding Sandusky for more than two years are "difficult to fathom," the prosecutors wrote in their response that Penn State hid information.

According to Moulton, Eshbach apparently believed that asking Penn State wasn't necessary, as she'd assumed that if Penn State had been aware of any prior allegations, they would have been reported to Clinton County CYS or State Police.

Fina apparently told Moulton that he was concerned that alerting Penn State to the existence of the investigation may have jeopardized its secrecy. A third explanation offered was that prior to former assistant Mike McQueary being identified as an eye witness to Sandusky's abuse, officials had no reason to believe that Sandusky had committed offenses on Penn State's campus.

What Moulton's report leaves out is that a 1998 police report made to PSU Police about alleged abuse at the hands of Sandusky and other documentation had "been hidden by the university." The prosecutors wrote that they are "hesitant" to go into detail about this alleged failure on the part of Penn State, as three former administrators are still awaiting trial on charges they covered up crimes committed by Sandusky.

However, they wrote that they believe they have evidence that will show that "there was a concerted effort to hide this information for years."

Throughout the prosecutors' six-page response, they continuously accuse Kane of political opportunism and consistently remind readers that they didn't support her and Moulton's investigation to begin with.

"The report was clearly born out of political opportunism and posturing," they wrote. "We must admit that, despite emerging from such unsavory origins, it is, like a mushroom, at least in part palatable."

And while Moulton's report certainly draws conclusions that prosecutors overseeing the Sandusky investigation dragged their feet on it for too long, the prosecutors themselves seemed proud of how they handled it, calling their own prosecution "near-perfect."

"Like all teams, we possessed individual strengths, weaknesses, differences and personalities, but our differences and disagreements never hindered or weakened our efforts," they wrote. "Rather they made us stronger. No member of this team deserves criticisms or censure by the public because this team accomplished a very rare feat: the near perfect discovery and prosecution of a horribly successful serial pedophile."

Logged

" Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Moynihan

Jerry Sandusky is pursuing one final legal option to overturn his conviction, according to his attorney.

Defense attorney Al Lindsay of Butler recently notified Centre County court that he is representing Sandusky. Lindsay said in an email to StateCollege.com he will represent Sandusky with a post conviction relief petition.

The Post Conviction Relief Act in Pennsylvania allows convicted defendants to challenge their sentences based on an argument of poor legal representation.

State College defense attorney Matt McClenahen, who is not affiliated with the case, says the option is available for wrongfully convicted defendants and is often utilized by defendants sentenced to life in prison or the death penalty as a final legal option.

“It’s a remedy that you have if you’re a defendant and you’ve been convicted and you’ve exhausted all your appeal rights, or wish to forgo appeal rights, you can allege your attorney was ineffective in someway preventing you from having a fair trial,” says McClenahen. “The defendant can seek relief if they believe the action or the inaction of the attorney was so ineffective that no accurate determination of guilt or innocence would have been possible.”

Issues a defendant might highlight could be an attorney failing to present or object to certain evidence or failing to file particular motions before or during trial, says McClenahen.

McClenahen says the success rate for such a petition is small as most defendants who pursue this path actually did receive fair representation and there was overwhelming evidence to support their convictions.

Sandusky, a former Penn State football coach is serving 30 to 60 years in state prison. In 2012, a jury found him guilty on 45 counts of sexually abusing 10 boys over a 15-year period. Some of the abuse occurred on Penn State’s campus. So far, Penn State has reached monetary settlements with 26 people claiming to be victims for a total of $59.7 million. After trial, Jerry and Dottie Sandusky’s adopted son, Matt Sandusky, publicly claimed to be one of Sandusky’s victims.

During trial, defense attorneys Joe Amendola of State College and Karl Rominger of Carlisle represented Sandusky. Since, Rominger has been debarred.

In April, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court declined to hear Sandusky’s case. Norris Gelman, Sandusky’s appeal attorney, had asked for a new trial, arguing it took Sandusky’s accusers too long to come forward.More...

Logged

" Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Moynihan

An Alle-Kiski lawyer has added another name to his list of high-profile clients — Jerry Sandusky.

Buffalo Township defense attorney Alexander “Al” Lindsay Jr. will represent the former Penn State assistant football coach in the next phase of his case.

Lindsay will be filing a Post Conviction Relief Act petition.

“He sought us out to represent him on this particular part of that case,” Lindsay said.

Some of the reasons such a petition can be filed: if it is believed the client's previous counsel was ineffective, new evidence has been found, or there was a violation of the U.S. or Pennsylvania constitutions or law in the case.

“Were reviewing the material in the case, but it's a long process,” he said.

Lindsay said he couldn't reveal much about the Sandusky case at this time, but this isn't the first high-profile case Lindsay has taken on in his more than 40 years as a lawyer.

Some of the big cases include serving as defense attorney for the Rev. Richard Rossi, who was accused of attempting to murder his wife, and John Vojtas, the former police officer accused of killing a man during a traffic stop. The Rossi case ended in a hung jury, and Vojtas was acquitted of all charges.

Logged

" Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Moynihan

Jerry Sandusky's adopted son who has said he was also abused by the convicted pedophile is breaking his silence.

Matt Sandusky, whose allegations never resulted in charges, has revealed details about his alleged abuse to Oprah, and the interview is scheduled to air next week, her network announced today.

The television interview, which will air on OWN at 9 p.m. on July 17, will be his first since his adoptive father was convicted in June 2012. Former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky is serving out a 30- to 60-year prison sentence for molesting 10 boys.

Logged

" Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Moynihan

A Superior Court turned down Louis Freeh’s request that the stay in Graham Spanier’s lawsuit against him be lifted Monday, saying that it did not have jurisdiction to reverse the stay ruling of the Centre County judge who made it.

Arguments for Freeh’s appeal were heard in May in Philadelphia. The stay was issued by Centre County Judge Jonathan Grine, mandating that the Freeh v. Spanier lawsuit be put on hold until the criminal case against Spanier, Tim Curley and Gary Schultz was over. Grine did so because the allegations against Spanier in the Freeh Report and in the commonwealth’s criminal case against the trio are the so similar. Furthermore, Spanier’s ability to invoke the Fifth Amendment in depositions related to the case that would prevent information for the civil suit from being collected necessitated a stay, to Grine.More...

Logged

" Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Moynihan

A panel of state judges Monday refused to overturn a ruling that allows ex-Penn State University President Graham Spanier to delay filing a defamation lawsuit against former FBI director Louis Freeh until Spanier's criminal case linked to the Jerry Sandusky scandal is resolved.

In fact, the Superior Court panel found it lacks jurisdiction to even review Freeh's challenge to a Centre County judge's ruling that stays the filing of a civil lawsuit Spanier has indicated he will pursue against Freeh and his law firm.

Spanier, 65, is targeting Freeh over the so-called Freeh Report issued to Penn State officials in 2012. That examination concluded that Spanier had concealed critical information from investigators in the Sandusky child-sex case.More...

Interesting comments...

Logged

" Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Moynihan

HARRISBURG, Pa. -- Other members of Jerry Sandusky's family say they're standing by him after one of his adopted sons described to Oprah Winfrey allegations of sexual abuse by the former Penn State assistant football coach.

The family released a statement on Friday saying none of them ever saw abuse or any indication of inappropriate activity.

Matthew Sandusky said in Thursday's broadcast that his adopted father subjected him to a range of sexual abuse, including oral sex.

The statement is from Sandusky's wife, Dottie, and the couple's other five adopted children.

It says attacking Matthew will provoke him and they're worried about what he'll say about the family.snipped

Logged

Brothers and Sisters, I bid you beware/Of giving your heart to a dog to tear -- Rudyard Kipling

One who doesn't trust is never deceived...

'I remained too much inside my head and ended up losing my mind' -Edgar Allen Poe

HARRISBURG, Pa. -- Other members of Jerry Sandusky's family say they're standing by him after one of his adopted sons described to Oprah Winfrey allegations of sexual abuse by the former Penn State assistant football coach.

The family released a statement on Friday saying none of them ever saw abuse or any indication of inappropriate activity.

Matthew Sandusky said in Thursday's broadcast that his adopted father subjected him to a range of sexual abuse, including oral sex.

The statement is from Sandusky's wife, Dottie, and the couple's other five adopted children.

It says attacking Matthew will provoke him and they're worried about what he'll say about the family.snipped

(BBM) Like I would take the word of Dottie Sandusky, who is so in denial, imo. The Sandusky case isn't the first where a wife can't see the forest for the trees.

Logged

" Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Moynihan